[statecom-discuss] [candidate-development] Fwd: calling lists? GRP communications?

[Merelice]

Betts,

In light of what you have witnessed in emails, I'm not surprised you
are disaffected.

But if you had been able to attend the last two StateCom meetings, I
think you would be greatly reassured. Both meetings had
well-above-quorum attendance (up to 25). Both meetings welcomed new
members from parts of the state that haven't been represented. Both
meetings by and large exhibited respectful behavior and listening. And
most important, both meetings passed proposals of real substance and
exciting possibilities. If/When you receive your newsletter, you will
read about some of the actions taken.

So take heart, dear heart. This, too, will pass.

Merelice



On 1/31/08, Betty H. Zisk <zisk at bu.edu> wrote:
> I am asking Merelice to post this statement since I dont think I have
>  posting rights on statecom list. I will try very hard to be brief. I have
>  been one of the members of long standing (since 1986)who is no longer on
>  Statecom but who has followed the debates and minutes and reports intensely.
>  I am still a registered Green and intend to vote on Tues. But I am deeply
>  ASHAMED of my party. My party with whom I fell in love before it even gained
>  party status. And I fear I transmit this shame to my students just by
>  avoiding all discussion of GRP. Not last semester when I mentioned the fact
>  that I was a GRP member and was proud of our local candidates and urged them
>  to be active. But this semester when I receive an extraordinary number of
>  calls from students who have journalism assignments about the election (I
>  think I have received over 20 calls from not just my students but from other
>  colleges--I guess due to my  BU web site which lists parties). I have
>  avoided any mention of late of GRP or Greens US or third parties. Yes this
>  would be an ideal time to mention GRP. Why dont I do it? Ask yourselves this
>  question: why should ANYONE vote Green -Rainbow except for hopes of change
>  in the long haul? And then ask yourself if voting GRP is really a hope for
>  change. Really--being honest.
>
>  I am not formally leaving or resigning. But I will probably vote for Obama
>  if nominated.  Why? Because at least in Mass this is a party of confusion,
>  of dissent, of disarray. We never spoke with one voice (and indeed we
>  welcomed dissent) but we were never so disrespectful and dogged in our
>  opinions, at least in my experience as we are at present. I cite just two
>  examples: Mike H. who simply cant let go of the legalties of Nader on the
>  ballot, and John who simply cant let go of anything,and who has a
>  conspritorial view of our own process. My personal views of who is right or
>  wrong on Nader issue isnt the pt. My pt is that I am ashamed of this debate.
>  It has descended into levels that remind me of the ideological debate in the
>  late 1980s between the Bookchin and Spretnak wings of the movement: that
>  particular debate led to the split in the Greens that continued for some
>  years with disastrous effects. I continue to have a dim faith. I care. But I
>  am massively disaffected. Betts Zisk
>
> -----Original Message-----
>  From: candidate-development-bounces at green-rainbow.org
>  [mailto:candidate-development-bounces at green-rainbow.org]On Behalf
>  Merelice
>  Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:25 PM
>  To: candidate development
>  Cc: Green-Rainbow Party (GRP) Administrative Committee
>  Subject: Re: [candidate-development] Fwd: calling lists? GRP
>  communications?
>
>
>  Please note: I have deleted the two names that John added since this
>  response relates to how the party functions and not to any candidate.
>  Meanwhile, I request that people not escalate an already sensitive
>  situation. Let's prove we can take care of the world by taking care of
>  each other.
>  Merelice
>
>  On 1/31/08, Jamie O'Keefe <jokeefe at jamesokeefe.org> wrote:
>
>  > On Jan 31, 2008 1:09 PM, John Walsh <john.walsh at umassmed.edu> wrote:
>  >  > So I thought.  Is this kind of hesitation what is holding up the
>  >  > distribution of the lists?
>  >
>  > Well it would help if the request got to the right person, either Dan
>  >  or I.  I did mention that the lists are available and what was
>  >  required at Sunday's state com. meeting which you were at.
>
>  It is unrealistic to expect people to know or remember how to request
>  our lists, even when mentioned in passing at a meeting. I find it
>  particularly disturbing to hear that phone calls and emails to the GRP
>  number and address did not get a response from us and/or did not get
>  referred to the appropriate individuals. Such people should get an
>  apology.
>
>  This may be another symptom that too few people are trying to do too
>  much. But responding promptly to those trying to contact the party
>  should get top priority. Otherwise, all the outreach efforts in the
>  world won't succeed in building the party.
>
>  How can we correct this oversight?
>
>  Merelice